Shakespeare's Kings: The Great Plays and the History of England in the Middle Ages: 1337-1485

I was recently fortunate enough to attend the Stratford Festival of Canada where I saw, among other Shakespearean plays, the two parts of Henry IV and Henry V. It was a wonderful experience but I began thinking about the events depicted in these plays; namely, how historically accurate was what I saw? This theme of historical accuracy in plays and movies has become rather popular lately, inspiring a number of books and documentaries. In an attempt to answer this question for Shakespeare's history plays, I read this book, Shakespeare's Kings, by John Julius Norwich and I'm glad I did.This is a very well-written and informative book. In chapters alternating between history and the corresponding Shakespearean play, Norwich covers the period from Edward III through Richard II, Henry IV, Henry V, Henry VI, Edward IV, Edward V to Richard III. The history chapters are clear and concise considering the large number of people that populate them, and how they are often executed, banished and losing and gaining lands and titles. Norwich is also quite good at offering different views on the period before settling on the view he feels is most substantiated. He then follows the history with an examination of the appropriate play, explaining how events are telescoped and rearranged, how characters are sometimes mistaken and invented and how even history must suffer if drama is to be maintained. I am particularly fond of the fact that Norwich doesn't let historical inaccuracies interfere with his appreciation of what a dramatist like Shakespeare needs to accomplish for a successful play. History and drama are not the same.I was also interested to see a discussion of the play Edward III which, according to some scholars, is a recent addition to the Shakespearean canon. I had not heard of this play before nor its attribution of authorship to Shakespeare but it is listed as part new edition of the New Cambridge Shakespeare, for one. I was very glad to discover this so I could look into the matter. It is nice to see an author comment on the most current scholarship, however we might ultimately feel about the conclusions.A final note worth mentioning to the interested reader: this book only deals with the history of the two major tetralogies. It does not cover the "fictional" histories (like King Lear, Macbeth, etc.) nor with the English histories out of sequence (King John, King Henry VIII). For what it does cover, however, it is an invaluable tool. Particularly for those who, like myself, enjoy these Shakespearean histories.

Most surveys of Shakespeare focus on his literary writing and talents: this provides a focus on his history, examining the events and characters in his plays and the realities which inspired them. This is recommended reading for any avid Shakespeare fan as well as college-level students: it examines the nine works which sum England's history of the times and analyzes each in the light of historical questions and background.

Make no mistake, JJ Norwich wields a wicked pen. He is a first class writer and historian, and if anyone can make history readable for a general audience he can. History is complex, however. Nothing is ever as it seems and following the thread as it weaves through the lives of the English royalty from Edward II through Henry VII, is difficult at best and confounding at worst. This is largely owing to five major factors--1) The royal families are large, interrelated, and keep marrying their cousins from abroad; 2) People change sides faster than you can swear an oath of fealty; 3) Titles are gained, lost, and assumed with every death. Just who the heck is York anyway; 4) Most of the kings are lazy, crazy, or have exceedingly ambitious wives; 5) Most of the nobles and clergy are crazy, lazy, or have ambitious wives. In the end, the only folks you really care about are the villeins and thank goodness, they eventually prevail. (Anyone who thinks Africans were the only people ever enslaved needs to read a little European history.) I am sure I have been able to read and understand most of this book because of my prior exposure to Allison Weir--whom Norwich cites in his bibliography, particularly the "Wars of the Roses" and "The Children in the Tower." I also read an entertaining work of fiction entitled "Katherine" by Anya Seton which covers the years 1340-1399. The book is about Katherine Swynford, mistress and then wife of John of Gaunt, mother of all those little Beaufords, and ancestor of Elizabeth I.Norwich skillfully weaves factual history with excerpts of Shakespeare's dialogue from the history plays Edward III to Richard II. He fills in the blanks, puts the pieces together, and corrects the historical errors or at least notes them. In the end, we have a beautiful work. The reader must read other works on Shakespeare to understand the plays, as this is primarily a history.

This was a very compelling read. I often find history books dry, but Norwich makes British history so interesting that you won't want to put it down. Highly recommended.